I dunno about you guys, but I want our FO to be able to afford bringing back our stars when their rookie contracts expire.

I don't think we are in a good position financially to make this move.

"I'm not the type to let a sleeping giant lie. I wake up the giant, slap him around, make him mad and beat him to the ground. I talk a big game because I carry a big stick." --- All-Pro Stanford Graduate

TheRealDTM wrote:Flynn and a 2nd rounder sounds great to me. No WR in the draft better than Harvin

Value is what matters when you are building a team under the constraints of a salary cap. Thanks to the rookie wage scale there will be quite a few WRs in the draft who are much better values than Harvin would be.

Any team that trades for Harvin is going to need to work out a $10-$12 million/year contract with him and then deal with his migraine issues and attitude problems. On the other hand, that second round pick that you want to give up is going to net us a promising young rookie who we will pay just $1 million/year for four years. That value is worth it's weight in gold and is the reason why the teams that draft well win Super Bowls while the ones who sign expensive FA's miss the playoffs.

Imagine if we had six second round picks. We could draft a high upside WRs, a stud TE, a young QB with upside to backup Russell, a good weak side LB and a lineman on both sides of the ball. Their combined salary would be just half of what it would take to pay Harvin. Our only problem is that we do not have as many second round picks as we would like and there is no reason why we should give up the one we do have just to overpay somebody else.

I agree with almost everything you just said. However we're talking about 1 2nd round pick not six, Harvin will impact our team more than a 2nd rounder (Russell Wilsons excluded). And there's always ways to manipulate cap to keep your core guys, look at the patriots. We are going to have roster turnover but i'd rather have Harvin than Sidney. The vikings think so to, even being intimate with Harvin's issues.

4/27/13 - I was there #humblethug"He looked like a bad man," Sherman said, "and I knew we were alright."

After reading a lot of this thread and thinking about it - put me in the camp of bring Harvin to Seattle. I think with a talent like him our offense would be pretty much unstoppable and only help the defense that much more.

I understand the risks with Harvin - but I think he is worth it. You can't always play it safe if you want a Championship. Harvin could put us over the top next year. Do it!

While I agree that there is some talent in the draft this year, I'd argue that unless you hit on one of the two receivers that end up being game changers that contribute the entire year and are able to consistently get separation and run routes like a veteran, you are much better suited adding a bonefide GAME CHANGER that a defense HAS TO gameplan for. The Seahawks are already right there, we are ready to push for a Superbowl now, not in two years when a rookie develops, but this season, a healthy and motivated Harvin with Russell Wilson would be a "championship move". Go Hawks.

SNDavidson wrote:While I agree that there is some talent in the draft this year, I'd argue that unless you hit on one of the two receivers that end up being game changers that contribute the entire year and are able to consistently get separation and run routes like a veteran, you are much better suited adding a bonefide GAME CHANGER that a defense HAS TO gameplan for. The Seahawks are already right there, we are ready to push for a Superbowl now, not in two years when a rookie develops, but this season, a healthy and motivated Harvin with Russell Wilson would be a "championship move". Go Hawks.

Agree 100% with this. If we have to overpay a few guys to make that final push for the Super Bowl do it. There are no guarantees of anything down the line, and as great as JS has been in the draft, a rookie WR may never turn out to be what Harvin can be. I say go for the Super Bowl.

Harvin is set to make 2.9 million in the last year of his deal, and it seems he wants north of 10 million per year in his new deal.

No doubt it would cost at least a second to get him, plus half the free cap Seattle has right now. The move would make us probably the odds on favorite for the title, though. It would probably handicap any efforts to fix the D-line through free agency, so there are risks.

Last year, around this time, Vikings coach Leslie Frazier kept hearing about Percy Harvin.

First, while coaching the Senior Bowl in Mobile, Ala., and later at the 2012 NFL Combine in Indianapolis, Frazier was repeatedly approached by opposing coaches, who in casual conversation just kept mentioning how much of a headache it was to defend Harvin.

The energetic slot receiver was just so slippery, so dynamic, so explosive.

I'd like to see us draft a WR instead of over paying for a FA thats not what we truely need. Let me throw a name at you, Darrel Jackson. If we could draft a young player of his caliber, which Jackson was a second rounder, we could mover Tate to the slot and coupled with our current offence. "M-O-N-E-Y" Draft Rogers in the third round! Plus we could draft Ertz in round 1. Harvin..... please no way.

I just like the way JS rolls with PC. I trust that no matter what these guys do, that they won't over-commit to anyone. The way they draft is just amazing. This team in its current form is primarily built of recent draft picks, I don't see them doing anything crazy for one player in FA.

If they see Harvin as a valuable cog, I'm certain they will entertain some interest, but I am more excited for the draft than anything.

The only concern I have and I mean only is that Bevell will get cute and pass even though Lynch is gaining yardage. 1/30/2015 - loaf

Percy is a better version of Golden Tate and the way Tate is improving who knows for that long that will be true. What we need is a number one receiver, tall strong and fast that stretches the field if Sidney goes down for a game or more, we can very likely find this on this years draft on the second round.

So giving up a second rounder and half of our cap for a receiver the vikings don't want makes no sense to me.

spend half our cap on two DL guys, draft a TE WR in rounds 1 and 2 and at least two more DL in the early rounds and we will find the promised land

Why pay Larry Fitzgerald money to a guy who will only be PART of an above average receiving core?

We already know dude will hold out from TC without the new contract.

"I'm not the type to let a sleeping giant lie. I wake up the giant, slap him around, make him mad and beat him to the ground. I talk a big game because I carry a big stick." --- All-Pro Stanford Graduate

Harvin is intriguing, especially if we could get him for a 2nd round pick (which I highly doubt).

But acquiring Harvin does three things;

1. Makes Tate expendable, which means 3 yrs of developing him goes down the drain. 2. Still doesn't address our need for a "X" receiver opposite of Rice. Someone that plays wide ALL THE TIME, and stretches the defense with speed.3. How much of a cap hit would Harvin be?.......and would his signing mean we can't upgrade the lines, which should be priority #1.

If getting Harvin means having a harder time signing free agent line help and lessens our ability to re-sign and restructure contracts for other key players next year. Then my answer is no.

If posters are convinced that he would not be a malcontent if we traded for him, what about trading for him and NOT immediately signing him to a new deal and only have him for the remaining 2013 $2.9 million contract?

We would then get the "all in approach" that i'm seeing the pro-Harvin camp advocate, while not ruining our cap space when we need to start resigning guys after next season.

I doubt this would work based on Harvin's desire to hold out if he stays with the Vikings but it does seem to be a compromise.

Hawken-Dazs wrote:I dunno about you guys, but I want our FO to be able to afford bringing back our stars when their rookie contracts expire.

I don't think we are in a good position financially to make this move.

It is reasonable to think Harvin will command between $7M-$10M per year. What you also have to consider is when we trade Flynn his Base Salary is $5.2 Mil and Ben Obomanu's is not likely to be on the roster this season and his base salary of $2.3M is expandable. So $7.5M of new cap space would make it fairly easy to get Harvin on board and barely touch our current cap space ($18.6M).

18.5+7.5= $26M

Another possibility is that Harvin makes Leon expandable and his base is $1.5M.

26+1.5=$27.5M

So those that don't want to sacrifice our current cap situation should not worry, now if you were already expecting $27.5M is cap space and still don't want Harvin, then I ask who are we going to spend that on? and how much do we really need to roll over?

I'd be willing to spend$8M Harvin$4M Branch$4M Jones$5M FA DE/DTThat leaves us $6M to rollover to next year and that's assuming Branch and Jones are back.

this would be a pointless trade as the seahawks already have a poor man's Harvin in Golden Tate (they are both coming up on new contracts.. Harvin is going to cost about $8-10 mill a year.. Tate will be less than half that). they are nearly identical players Harvin just has better speed.. Tate is on the upswing however and proved to be clutch this year scoring some big tds and was the only guy on seattle that displayed good YAC. My guess is he continues to improve as he and Russell Wilson have become very good friends and hang out on the regular with their wives.. Seahawk's management isn't stupid.. they will keep their draft picks and let that chemistry build into something special.. not to mention mike wallace in free agency is a much better option for the seahawk's if they want to improve the receiving core.. he has played sandlot ball in pittsburgh for the last several years and has the speed we need to stretch the field on deep balls.. rice and wallace on the edges and tate in the slot would be DANGERUSS.

redhawk253 wrote:this would be a pointless trade as the seahawks already have a poor man's Harvin in Golden Tate (they are both coming up on new contracts.. Harvin is going to cost about $8-10 mill a year.. Tate will be less than half that). they are nearly identical players Harvin just has better speed.. Tate is on the upswing however and proved to be clutch this year scoring some big tds and was the only guy on seattle that displayed good YAC. My guess is he continues to improve as he and Russell Wilson have become very good friends and hang out on the regular with their wives.. Seahawk's management isn't stupid.. they will keep their draft picks and let that chemistry build into something special.. not to mention mike wallace in free agency is a much better option for the seahawk's if they want to improve the receiving core.. he has played sandlot ball in pittsburgh for the last several years and has the speed we need to stretch the field on deep balls.. rice and wallace on the edges and tate in the slot would be DANGERUSS.

Harvin was a league MVP candidate last year during the first half of the season. He has scary speed, can return, catch and run out of the backfield.

Golden Tate has none of these things. Remember, we tried to have him return punts? Yeah, that didn't work out too well. I love me some Golden, but you're selling Harvin short by saying we don't need him because we already have Tate. Tate is closer to a Bobby Ingram type, than a Percy Harvin gamechanger type of player.

I'm betting Pete really wants him, bad. He is the quintessential Pete Carroll special weapon/fiery competitor, with a little immature youth to mold with his win forever magic. He is Pete's dream boat. If you asked Pete to ID his perfect offensive weapon it would be Percy Harvin.... And Bevell knows how to use the kid!

I really don't get the obsession some people have with nabbing another supposed superstar receivers at a $10 million+ price tag.

Two things: 1) FA receiver acquisitions have to have the biggest bust rate of any position in the NFL; 2) Great QBs can win without a top 5 receiver and have done it time and time again. No one thought Denver had a better set of receivers than Seattle before Peyton got there. Brady has consistently been successful with plug-and-play journeymen as his targets. Eli has made receivers with mere above-average talent look better than they are.

I've been saying it since the season ended: if there's a good value proposition out there at WR, of course you jump on it, but this is not a position worth sinking a huge amount of additional cap space in. It would be a different story if we didn't already have a commitment to Rice. But we do.

DavidSeven wrote:I really don't get the obsession some people have with nabbing another supposed superstar receivers at a $10 million+ price tag.

Two things: 1) FA receiver acquisitions have to have the biggest bust rate of any position in the NFL; 2) Great QBs can win without a top 5 receiver and have done it time and time again. No one thought Denver had a better set of receivers than Seattle before Peyton got there. Brady has consistently been successful with plug-and-play journeymen as his targets. Eli has made receivers with mere above-average talent look better than they are.

I've been saying it since the season ended: if there's a good value proposition out there at WR, of course you jump on it, but this is not a position worth sinking a huge amount of additional cap space in. It would be a different story if we didn't already have a commitment to Rice. But we do.

A. How is a 24 year old electric game changer bad value?B. I agree with whatever JS chooses to pay anybody.

SNDavidson wrote:A. How is a 24 year old electric game changer bad value?

When that 24 year old has a history of injury and personality concerns and that money can be spent more effectively on other areas (namely defensive line). No one was saying another 5'10-5'11 slot guy was the key piece we needed at the end of last season. If we could pay him on his rookie deal, it might be worth considering, but Harvin has already said he plans to hold out for a bigger contract. If we're going to pay big money to another receiver, he better either be big and physical or a speedster on the edges. Harvin is neither.

Alright, like most of you guys I've read up on just about everything I can get my hands on regarding Harvin and listened to all the interviews. Here's my .02 FWIW.

As with all things that John Schneider and Pete Carroll do, it's all about value judgment -- just how much is it going to cost to land Harvin vs. the possible negative consequences of bringing in a potentially volatile personality like this. Putting my counseling hat back on for a second, Harvin profiles as being a highly Obsessive-Compulsive personality with probable Bipolar Disorder thrown in the mix. Now, just to take away the stigma of that for those of you who might be blanching at reading this -- everyone (and I mean everyone) can be diagnosed with something (even me). This is basically academic in the sense that it helps understand some of the personality dynamics going on here.

So in essence what I believe we have here is a guy who wants to win -- and to win badly at all costs. He may struggle at times with being able to relate to his teammates because of the overwhelming obsession with wanting to win has the potential of getting in the way in his relations with others. If in his head he perceives those around him as somehow not being as serious in wanting to achieve that goal of winning as badly as he does (i.e. they're having too much fun) -- he could turn on them and cohesion in the locker room could suffer, as he's going to let everyone know about it. If a coach's directions, decisions, etc. don't make sense in his own mind (or he doesn't agree with the course of action) -- he also has the potential of turning on them. It's as if he's unconsciously saying, "I know how things ought to be done and if you're not doing them my way -- it has to be wrong."

That type of intensity CAN be channeled ... but it is certainly an art-form -- let me tell you. In some ways, this is not unlike the same type of dynamics that Marshawn Lynch brings to the team. He's fairly aloof as well in the way that he deals with both the media and his teammates. But it works for him because they let him do his thing ... and they know what he's going to be about come Sunday morning. Russell Wilson brings a bit of that same singular focus (it's all about winning) as well. So yes, in theory is could work -- but you've got to keep in mind that unlike Lynch and Wilson, this guy can be volatile.

If anyone could harness such a personality and turn it in the right direction -- Pete Carroll MIGHT be that guy. But there are other coaches on this staff besides Carroll. How would he deal with other coaches like Tom Cable, for example, who to me reminds me a lot of Leslie Frazier. That's something else that ought to be considered.

YES, the talent is certainly there. But you DO have to wonder about the level of commitment. If he's truly going to be all in ... and the cost to bring him in isn't totally prohibitive, it might be worth a look see. Personally, if we're talking about anything more than the type of deal that the Hawks did in bringing in Lendale White (in this particular case, I'd say 5th Rounder or below) ... then I'd personally say pass. Percy Harvin could very easily turn out to be Kellen Winslow Part 2 -- a guy who in the end couldn't let go of HIS IDEAS of what his role ought to be -- and of just how valuable he thought he was. We saw how well that played out last year when push came to shove.

SNDavidson wrote:A. How is a 24 year old electric game changer bad value?

When that 24 year old has a history of injury and personality concerns and that money can be spent more effectively on other areas (namely defensive line). No one was saying another 5'10-5'11 slot guy was the key piece we needed at the end of last season. If we could pay him on his rookie deal, it might be worth considering, but Harvin has already said he plans to hold out for a bigger contract. If we're going to pay big money to another receiver, he better either be big and physical or a speedster on the edges. Harvin is neither.

Speed, catching abitility, route running, fire, and YAC YAC YAC YAC. Steve Largent wasn't big or fast. Harvin is literally a threat to score every time you put the ball in his hands, pretty valuable in my book, he changes your offense.

The more I think about this, the more I hope we make a move for Harvin. Right now, our offense is very, very good. With Harvin, it's downright scary. Opposing defenses already have to sell out on the run to stop arguably the second-best running back in the NFL, plus the threat of a mobile QB with great escapability who can actually throw. Add one of the most electrifying wideouts in the league to that equation: how is anyone going to stop that? That's not even mentioning legitimate threats like Sidney Rice, Zach Miller, Golden Tate, Doug Baldwin, and Robert Turbin.

One of the opposing arguments I keep hearing for this potential deal is that we have young guys who will need to be paid soon. I don't want to lose any of our better players either, but all of our core players (Wilson, Sherman, Thomas, Okung, Wagner) have multiple years left on their contracts. Some are worried about holdouts, but thanks to the new CBA, those guys couldn't sign new deals right deal if Paul Allen gave them a signed blank contract. Cap hell is extremely overrated anyway. If your cap guys know what they're doing, you can do pretty much whatever you want. How many years have the Redskins been way over the cap, only to sign more players, without losing anyone important? Not that the Redskins are a shining example of how to run a franchise, but they are a good example of how overrated alleged cap problems are.

I don't know how credible the rumors are, but the rumor right now is that the Vikings would be willing to part with Harvin for less than a first round pick. How often are 24-year old players with his ability available? This isn't the age-old question of seasoned veteran vs unproven rookie. Harvin is only a year or two older than most of the rookie wideouts in this draft class, and we already know that he's a stud. As far as I'm concerned, if the Vikings were willing to accept something like a 2nd and a 4th, it's a no brainer.

I see Harvin as a Vince Young type, emotional fiery and unable to control himself. I also see him as a injury prone guy due to how you use him to begin with, he's not a real physical speciman.

No thanks at the cost it would be, we are not building for one year, were building for a repetitive representation. You guys can all enjoy your 30 seconds with Jennifer Lawrence I would rather spend all night with Hallie Berry.

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

If Pete wants him Pete shall have him. Pete was completely jacked when he was describing Harvin before we played Minni. He couldn't say enough good about him. I don't know if that was just pre-game talk or not but if it had a sliver of truth we may see Pete make a good case to get him. Do we need him, probably not.

travlinhawk wrote:If Pete wants him Pete shall have him. Pete was completely jacked when he was describing Harvin before we played Minni. He couldn't say enough good about him. I don't know if that was just pre-game talk or not but if it had a sliver of truth we may see Pete make a good case to get him. Do we need him, probably not.

Pete has said that about most the players he cut also..................

To Be P/C or Not P/C That is the Question..........Seahawks kick Ass !!!! Check your PM's, Thank you for everything Radish RIP My Friend. Member of the 38 club.

No thanks. This is a fantasy league move. We have a QB who will make the players around him better, a la Peyton, Rodgers, Brady, etc. Put the money into a nasty D line and let Russell groom our future star WR draft picks, who will cost 1/10th that of Harvin.

I love what Harvin brings but Minny won't likely trade him to a championship contender for mere picks and/or Flynn. Next year Harvin is owed just $2.9 mil but a lucrative extension would need be negotiated. Adrian Peterson is fruitlessly lobbying for the Vikes to keep Harvin. People question Harvin's durability but despite being on many pregame injury reports he played despite injuries and migraines in his time with the Vikings. He was placed on IR this last half season but there was more to the story than a sprained ankle. And as much as folks would like to question Harvin's character he got along with his teammates in the locker room and built real comradery with the great players on his team. He remained loyal to Minny after seeing his receiver comrades get shipped out one by one. He withstood the many post-Favre quarterback controversies (Tavaris Jackson vs Sage Rosenfels, Sage vs Joe Webb, Webb vs Ponder). He suffered a heartbreaking loss to the Saints--one in which he made a crucial fumble. He saw Rice get traded, Favre retire and AD tear his ACL leaving him to question whether the FO and coaches would be able to build a contender again. In the past off season he was a workout partner and motivator for Peterson's epic comeback. He was an MVP level player in the first half despite still playing under his rookie contract. His main flaw is he's passionate and a fierce competitor on the field. Unfortunately a bad omen for Harvin and Seattle is Seahawks #12 is retired. Sorry Harvin.

Rat wrote:The more I think about this, the more I hope we make a move for Harvin. Right now, our offense is very, very good. With Harvin, it's downright scary. Opposing defenses already have to sell out on the run to stop arguably the second-best running back in the NFL, plus the threat of a mobile QB with great escapability who can actually throw. Add one of the most electrifying wideouts in the league to that equation: how is anyone going to stop that?

The more I think about this, the more I'm convinced that trading for Harvin would be a freaking bad idea. As I said above, there's no denying this guy's talent. I mean when things are going right, this guy can be a real game changer. I don't know why though ... but I keep hearkening back to another dynamic WR that the Seahawks had many years ago who was also a game changer and had a similar skillset -- Joey Galloway.

Like Harvin, Galloway incredible breakaway speed (dude could run a 4.18) and moves. Dennis Erickson and the Hawks fell in absolute love with that speed, envisioning that they could use him basically the exact same way that the Vikings use Harvin. And yeah -- he could be absolutely dynamic at times. But the fact of the matter is that the Seahawks never truly won with him. Now I know that people are going to be quick to point out that the Hawks didn't have the kind of overall talent on the team that they do now (and they're be right) -- but there was more to that IMO.

I actually met Joey Galloway (and John Kitna and others) back in 1999 when I was living in Spokane. In those days, training camp was held in Cheney ... and I up and decided to head out to Seahawks training camp one day to watch practice [Holmgren's first year with the team]. After practice, I had a chance to meet Galloway ... and let me tell you -- I walked away not liking the guy very much. He struck me as an extremely arrogant, pompous, me-first kind of player. He just rubbed me the wrong way. A real jerk I felt. Kitna wasn't like that -- nor were any of the other Hawks I met that day (Kitna and those other guys were very gracious, humble, team oriented, etc.) -- Galloway was the only one that wasn't like that. And the more that I think about it, the more I'm wondering if that's the kind of impression he left on Holmgren as well. Come that first offseason (February of 2000), Holmgren promptly traded Galloway to the Cowboys for a pair of 1st Round choices [in 2000 and 2001] -- who ended up becoming Shaun Alexander and Koren Robinson (oh well, 1 out of 2 ain't bad).

The Cowboys never truly won anything with Galloway either ... and neither did Tampa Bay after that. Seattle had 5 years of Joey Galloway in his prime and didn't win a thing. Now I'm not trying to suggest that Galloway necessarily had a bad attitude with his teammates ... was a real clubhouse cancer ... or was the reason that the Hawks and all of the other teams he was ever a part of didn't win a title because of him. There were far more factors involved in why they didn't win than that. What I am saying is that for whatever reason, this extremely fast dynamic playmaker DIDN'T make all the difference in the world. Despite his talent, he didn't transform those teams in to a contender by any means.

Remember, we had this exact same conversation about Brandon Marshall back in 2010 before he was traded to the Dolphins. The Phins traded two 2nd Round choices to the Broncos for Marshall. Just a mere 2 years later -- he's a Chicago Bear. Worked out well for Miami, huh?

Percy Harvin has demonstrated that he has electric talent ... but he also has shown an incredibly volatile personality to go along with it. According to reports, he was placed on the IR not because of an ankle injury ... but because of his attitude. Think about it -- he went on the IR with a supposed sprained ankle ... and the Vikings didn't even TRY to activate him for their biggest game of the year when they faced the Packers at Lambeau in the 1st Round of the Playoffs (a full 62 days after going on the IR).

All the talk surrounding him went from possible MVP Candidate early midway through the season ... to possibly being shipped out of town. The evidence is clear that the Vikings see Harvin as a potential cancer. Given all that has happened regarding him, it would be an absolute disaster for them to bring him back. In essence, they are over a barrel and I would say every team knows that by now. Why would you trade a 2nd or 3rd Round Pick for a guy that the Vikings likely will cut? It makes no sense. The only scenario I could possibly envision him coming to Seattle is either if the asking price is fairly low (I'd say a 5th Rounder or less) ... or if he gets cut altogether.

Given the overall package of who this guy is ... what the asking price sounds like it's going to be ... and the high likelihood that this may work out as well as Lendale White and Kellen Winslow did for Seattle ... I'd have to say pass.

Another thing to consider is that it does not take multiple years to develop youth in today's NFL. Rookies can come in and make an impact right away depending on the willingness of the coaching staff to devote resources to them. For each developmental prospects that is really raw there is another guy who has had four years of excellent modern college coaching and is as fast and strong as he will ever be.

Fans in this discussion seem to have been influenced too much by Tate's slow development and not nearly enough by all of our other rookies who have made instant impacts. Why is Tate more influential than Baldwin, who became one of our best two receivers was one of our best two receivers as an undrafted rookie?

BFS wrote:I just think Harvin is a talent I don't want to face twice a year. Whether he is with the Niners or the Rams.

Best case scenario is the 49ers paying him $12 million per year and then him missing our games with migraines, or throwing tantrums when he doesn't get the ball enough. He is very talented but there are lots of skilled but expensive FAs who have not produced up to the level of their contract, and whoever trades for Harvin will be paying him FA money.

Last edited by AgentDib on Tue Feb 12, 2013 10:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

If Steve Largent was in his mid 20's and playing for us right now, there would be a lot of people arguing he's not a #1 receiver.

49ers webzone: Win or lose, i hope you injure Sherman. Like a serious career ending injury. I don't want him to get paid.49ers webzone: noise should not be the overwhelming reason a team is favored. they need to spray noise-damping foam onto the ceiling of that place.

You all who don't want Harvin really need to listen to BestFightStory. He knows more about the Vikings than he knows about the Seahawks, and he knows more about the Seahawks than the rest of you combined.

Good Article by La Canfora at CBS"...I understand the injury concerns. I understand some of the issues of attitude and clashing with coaches. But I have talked to enough of his teammates to understand some of Harvin's frustrations with the lack of a full-bodied offensive attack with the Vikings, and to a man his teammates say he is driven to win. He can be immature and he's made some mistakes, but no one this talented hits the trade market this young unless there have been a few bumps in the road.

I'd take my chances with him.

In terms of yards after the catch, his numbers last season were nearly identical to those of Darren Sproles, again, without being a part of an offense nearly as balanced as the New Orleans', and without Drew Brees getting him the football. All he's done is average a ridiculous 6.4 yards per carry in his career. He has five career return touchdowns. His average of 74 scrimmage yards per game -- from 2009 to 2012 -- puts him right with receivers like DeSean Jackson and Vincent Jackson, and among all players with at least 50 rushes and 100 receptions since 2009, Harvin's average of 10.3 scrimmage yards per touch is far and away tops in the NFL..."

Basis4day wrote:Not for 10 million a year. This is salary cap football. Not fantasy football (Credit to John Clayton).

If you are able to consider that he is only due 2.6 this year then a 3 year extension at 10 MM per year isn't too bad- Save cap space next year and roll it over so that the 10 MM doesn't hurt so much. 32.6/4 is 8 MM per year. You can get creative with the cap so that we can cut/trade him in the final year if he's not producing (or can't afford him), then it's more like 7 MM per year.

Harvin is a guy I wouldn't worry about the money. I'd cut a guy like Rice in a heartbeat in two years if it came down to picking a 25 year old blue chip prospect vs a 30 year old WR...problem solved.

Basis4day wrote:Not for 10 million a year. This is salary cap football. Not fantasy football (Credit to John Clayton).

If you are able to consider that he is only due 2.6 this year then a 3 year extension at 10 MM per year isn't too bad- Save cap space next year and roll it over so that the 10 MM doesn't hurt so much. 32.6/4 is 8 MM per year. You can get creative with the cap so that we can cut/trade him in the final year if he's not producing (or can't afford him), then it's more like 7 MM per year.

Harvin is a guy I wouldn't worry about the money. I'd cut a guy like Rice in a heartbeat in two years if it came down to picking a 25 year old blue chip prospect vs a 30 year old WR...problem solved.

Rice is two years older than Harvin.

"I'm not the type to let a sleeping giant lie. I wake up the giant, slap him around, make him mad and beat him to the ground. I talk a big game because I carry a big stick." --- All-Pro Stanford Graduate